Description:
Installation of three no. free standing, non-illuminated, 2m high totem signs in three separate locations in Staines Town Centre.
Additional Information:
The Principal Planning Officer reported that there were no additional updates.
Public Speaking:
There were no public speakers.
It was agreed that each site would be debated and voted on separately.
Site 1, 23/01218/ADV, Land Adjacent to Elmsleigh Centre entrance, High Street, Staines-upon-Thames, TW18 4PQ
Debate:
During the debate the following key issues were raised:
- The Committee queried what the Totem was made of and whether they were safe. The Principal Planning Officer advised that they were made of powder coated aluminium with an anti-graffiti laminate.
- The Committee asked whether any consideration to visually impaired residents and were advised that while it was not a material planning consideration, County Highways had been consulted who had agreed the location was suitable.
- The Committee queried whether the position of the totem had been considered in relation to Staines Market. The Principal Planning Officer advised that relevant parties had been consulted and had confirmed the location was appropriate.
- The Committee felt that it was a good initiative which would aid visitors and support local businesses.
The Committee voted on the application as follows:
For: 12
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Site 2, 23/01220/ADV, ‘Bandstand’, Memorial Gardens, Staines-upon-Thames, TW18 4SD
Debate:
During the debate the following key issues were raised:
- That the Totem would be helpful to those arriving at Staines via boat or walking along the towpath.
- That it would be good to expand that initiative to other towns within the borough.
The Committee voted on the application as follows:
For: 12
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Site 3, 23/01223/ADV, Land on Station Path, Station Approach, Staines-Upon-Thames, TW18 4LY
Debate:
During the debate the following key issues were raised:
- The Committee queried whether the totem could be placed flat against the wall as opposed to perpendicular to it. The Principal Planning Officer advised that it had been considered but the applicant felt it would be less visible if flat to the wall.
- The Committee asked whether the applicant could change the content of the sign without needing to reapply and were advised that they could.
The Committee voted on the application as follows:
For: 12
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Decision: The applications were approved